finishing-a-development-branch
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
84
80%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
75%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description has strong completeness with an explicit 'Use when' clause and clear trigger conditions, and it occupies a distinct niche in the development workflow. However, it could be more specific about what concrete actions the skill performs beyond 'presenting structured options,' and could benefit from additional natural trigger term variations that developers might use.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Presents structured options for merging branches, creating pull requests, squashing commits, or cleaning up feature branches'
Include additional natural trigger term variations like 'pull request', 'push changes', 'ready to merge', 'submit code', 'done with feature' to improve keyword coverage
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (development workflow completion) and some actions (merge, PR, cleanup), but the actions are presented as options rather than concrete capabilities the skill performs. 'Guides completion of development work by presenting structured options' is somewhat vague about what it actually does. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Explicitly answers both 'what' (guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup) and 'when' (when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work). The 'Use when...' clause is present and specific. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms like 'merge', 'PR', 'tests pass', 'cleanup', and 'implementation is complete', which are natural developer terms. However, it misses common variations like 'pull request', 'push changes', 'submit code', 'done coding', 'finish task', or 'ready to merge'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | This has a clear niche: post-implementation decision-making about code integration. The specific trigger conditions (implementation complete, tests passing, deciding integration method) make it unlikely to conflict with general coding, testing, or git skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-crafted skill with excellent workflow clarity and actionability. Every step has concrete, executable commands and the multi-step process includes proper validation checkpoints (test verification gates, discard confirmation). The main weakness is moderate redundancy between the Common Mistakes, Red Flags, and the workflow steps themselves, which could be consolidated to save tokens.
Suggestions
Merge 'Common Mistakes' and 'Red Flags' into a single concise section or eliminate them entirely since the workflow steps already encode these constraints (e.g., the hard stop after test failure, the confirmation for discard).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Generally efficient but has some redundancy - the 'Common Mistakes' and 'Red Flags' sections overlap significantly (e.g., both mention test verification, discard confirmation, worktree cleanup rules). The quick reference table is useful but the red flags section largely restates what's already clear from the workflow steps. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash commands for every option, specific git and gh CLI commands, exact PR body templates, and concrete test commands. Each step has copy-paste ready code blocks with clear conditionals. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent sequential workflow with explicit validation checkpoints: tests must pass before proceeding (hard stop), tests re-verified after merge in Option 1, typed confirmation required for destructive Option 4, and clear feedback loops for test failures. The branching paths for each option are well-defined. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections progressing from overview to detailed steps to quick reference. The Integration section provides clean one-level-deep references to related skills. Content length is appropriate for inline presentation without needing external files. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- lucianghinda/superpowers-ruby
- Commit
cb03f92
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.